Consider this statement:
I don’t see how freedom of speech can be reconciled with religion.
Agreed, it can’t … not with the generic notion of “religion”. But with Christianity on the other hand, it is a vital precondition and interwoven with it. More on that further down.
Now consider this one:
Democracy as the alternative to 1984? Democracy has delivered 1984.
This is the cleverness of legerdemain. Whose legerdemain? Those originally posing that idea without context, whereas those putting it about may just be innocently parroting the indefensible, with great fervour.
Words are a giveaway and words can destroy, they can also prevent debate when two sides have opposing definitions of what those words mean, they’re not even on the same page to begin with.
It’s not that democracy has delivered 1984, it is the hijacking of democracy which has done that. Anything can be a good concept in itself until it is hijacked, just as the churches have now been hijacked by the global left [see Pope Francis].
A better question is whether democracy is susceptible to hijacking or not and yes, sadly, it is. You see, I’m not disagreeing with AJP Taylor on this – there is much to be castigated in democracy for sure. I’m not on about that in itself.
I’m on about something quite different:
I have lived with the devastation of socialism for some time and you wouldn’t wish it on your worst enemy.
The idea of living under some politburo’s idea of an ideal society, coerced from cradle to grave, stagnant, in penury – no thanks.
Then comes the leftwing/establishment dismissal:
Rattling on about Marxism and politburos is just strawmanning.
No it damn well isn’t. Dismissal of freedom and the damage caused by leftism, marxism, is in itself a very dangerous thing – this casual brushing aside is in fact the very essence of the problem we have today – people have no historicity to them now, they did not live under those conditions, they don’t know.
Any form of coercion in that “you will live according to my ideas” of what a good society is, is tyrannical. It’s the very act of forcing which is how the left gives itself away every single time.
The freedom to live, associate, worship is precisely what the global left is hellbent on removing from people now, even down to brainwashing infants.
It’s the oldest chestnut in the book to attack democracy without putting a viable alternative. Truly it was said that it’s the least worst variant of some pretty bad variants.
Before moving on, a few words on how democracy has been hijacked. Well it’s obvious, innit:
1. The reduction of poltics to two parties, the reds and the blues;
3. Hijacked preselection and parachuting;
4. Vote rigging, ballot box fraud.
There are others. Yes, it’s bad. The alternative is enslavement.
Now we get down to more than just systems of government, we’re getting down to possession of people’s souls, which the State is making a massive attempt to do, from Krankie’s “named person” to all the rest of it – Remoan’s pretence that there was no valid vote is one of these.
And what flows, once that’s accepted, is erosion – not just of the protections and freedoms, but of people’s morality itself. it is no accident that dissident rightists almost always warn of “demoralization” somewhere in the debate and Yuri Bezmenov meant two things by that word:
1. Despondence stemming from lawlessness, from removal of structures;
2. The removal of morality itself.
I saw that in Russia and as my mate there says, it robs a people of their souls. That is where we’re headed now. Textbook concepts have zero to do with what actually happens to a people under Marxism – the stagnation, the giving up, the sapping of the soul, the infantilization, the things the left never ever tells you about … as they’re brainwashed by the hegemony.
The EU idea of spoonfeeding or offering the teat to citizen infants ignores the central issue that you are also removing people’s self-determination, the ability to think for themselves, to take responsibility. Instead, like Ocasio-Cortez, the perfect marxist product, we get endless parroting of politburo mandated correct-think, but as we saw over and over with her, when tasked on it, she has no background, she has not been told the next bit yet.
That is what marxism does, it is no strawman, Senator William Jenner in 1954 would look at that statement and shake his head.
There are two screenshots now, germane to this issue:
The power of words, the power of leaving out the most important part, skewing the very meaning of what is being argued.
Yep, that’s what this is all about. 5-4 on the bench. That’s it, end of. Global left agenda stymied for a generation, destruction postponed. And the evil muvvers? Perfectly happy, as Jethro Tull sang, to “bend the rules”.
The rules, as Robert Bolt put into the mouth of Thomas More, were all that protects you from the devil himself, even if he was originally involved in their formulation. But Bolt missed a most important point – the role of a living God in all this.
So let’s go to the root of Christianity, John 3:16:
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
The critical word is “believeth”. Let’s put aside whether you do or do not believe that, that’s another question. What I’m pointing out here is that the whole issue in Christianity is believing or not – in other words, choice.
Coerced belief is lip service, not belief. Now that puts this remark in context:
I don’t see how freedom of speech can be reconciled with religion.
Speech itself, that’s another concept to be argued. But “free”, as in choice – ah, that’s the vital element in all of this. You cannot become Christian until you make a deliberate choice and I’d add that it has to be a choice from a standpoint of education and not leftist and pseudo-scientific, rationalist brainwashing from birth.
It’s a very hard thing these days to truly step outside of that brainwashing.
I’d also agree that in the olden days of the Church hardsell, it was equally as difficult to stand outside of one’s upbringing. My decision on the matter was reached rationally, by thinking it through, by putting many things on the table, by reading Philosophy 101 to 301 at university, and like far more august, yet vilified thinkers than I, coming to that same conclusion.
But this post, as I said, is not about that idea in itself, it’s about the quite clear notion that one must be free to choose. That’s the thrust.
No other religion offers that choice and for Church people to bastardize that into “thou shalt our way or we’ll burn you”, then I say that those people are for the fiery place themselves. Pointy-hatted men with grim visages pronouncing judgement are just as bad as the leftists insisting, on pain of violence against one’s person, or ruination in the case of Kavanaugh, to do as they say, to embrace their vision … or else.
I say to all of Them – get knotted. I am a free spirit who voluntarily threw in my lot with eternity. I can take it back anytime I wish, or I can continue.
Nothing in the leftist utopian vision allows of free choice, it is all “do as I say”. And who does the saying? The legions of leftists. And who is behind them? The global elite. And who is behind them in turn? See the Rolling Stones, they can tell you.
And the opposite of leftism – licentiousness – that is just as bad and behind it, if you follow it back down the corridors, is the same entity the Rolling Stones can tell you about. The very language of “do as thou wilt” is straight out of the playbook, as is dualism and relativism.
No, I flatly refuse both those extremes.
There are always limits to human behaviour. If I choose to stay in this society, I have to be able to live with them and thus there are rules – I must not kill them, commit violence upon them, shag their wives, lie and cheat. I must abide by these lifelaws because there is Someone watching what I do.
This is classical liberalism, conditional liberalism.
It is not licence, nor is it licentiousness – there are clear rules laid down in the scripture underpinning the west, the civilised man abides by those rules and treats people with dignity and courtesy.
After midnight, I must stop my noise on account of the neighbours – that’s the sort of thing I’m referring to. Not rattling on about irrelevancies, this is core. And the critical point here – I tell myself I must, because I wish for good relations with my neighbours. And I will not abide them not observing the conventions.
It is sophistry to call that stamping on their freedoms. Classical liberalism and licentiousness are two completely different things.
My freedom is not delivered by this government nor by any other government, nor by the EU, nor by the UN, it is delivered by our scriptural heritage, our underpinning, the one which people died for in the world wars.
It is not delusion, it is not a strawman, it is core to this society working that those precepts be ingrained in the very fabric of the society.
And it’s not too late to hold back the torrent for awhile, to stymie many of their plans and moves, though the end result is the end of western society, not naturally, as the marxists would have you believe, but through their endlessly funded own agency.
In other words, when there seems nothing else left, be bloodyminded and awkward.